Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Alright, so I used to play tau during 6th and 7th, and while their noninteraction in psychic or combat was annoying, they FUNCTIONED back then. With the way 8th and 9th score, coupled with the smaller table size, nerfed marker light, and higher emphasis on strong midfield units, tau kind of sucks right now. I have since moved onto other armies, but I have always wondered how to make tau function (without writing a new book from scratch), and I have an idea.
Allow tau to use their guns in combat.

Basically, treat every tau weapon as both a gun (rapid-fire, assault 4, etc.) and also a melee weapon (exact same stats, but based on WS and stat line attack count); this would allow them to still be WORSE in combat as they will rely on weapon skill, while also adding a new dimension to their playstyle. For example, take the burst cannon; it will get worse in combat going from its 4 shots at range to, I believe 2 attacks in combat (I think that's what battlesuits have), whereas a more expensive, lower output weapon like fusion blasters get MORE shots in combat (assuming you only have on blaster equipped) but hit worse.

I think this could give tau a new playstyle because it would encourage riskier play and give models more support systems; instead of taking a triple fusion blaster suit squad, you could take one blaster and one shield generator per suit and try to get them in combat. While it doesn't FIX tau, it would encourage them to get midfield and have units hardy enough to be there.

They should just get a new type of ranged designation, "Blaster" or something. Allowed them to "fight" in melee with ranged weapons, ala Gun-fu. Let them have 2+ BS in melee and all ranged weapons function as pistols. Done.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
They should just get a new type of ranged designation, "Blaster" or something. Allowed them to "fight" in melee with ranged weapons, ala Gun-fu. Let them have 2+ BS in melee and all ranged weapons function as pistols. Done.

Why 2+?

At the OP, you aren’t the first to recommend this. I think that a combination of letting some weapons function like Pistols, perhaps treating Suits like vehicles for shooting in combat, and expanded auxiliaries is the best way to do this.

How about something like this:

Close Fire Doctrine
When charging an enemy unit, a Tau Infantry model or Tau Drone model in engagement range of an enemy unit may forgo it's melee attacks in the Assault Phase and instead fire any Pulse Carbine or Pulse Pistol it is armed with, as though it were the shooting phase. A model firing a Pulse Carbine or Pulse Pistol in the Assault Phase is unaffected by any ability, rule or stratagem that would alter it's Ballistic Skill or To Hit rolls, except for negative modifiers.

A Tau Battlesuit model can fire any Burst Cannons it is armed with in the Assault Phase, as though it were a Tau Infantry model armed with a Pulse Carbine.



How does that look? I wanted to avoid overshadowing overwatch and represent Tau counter charging and laying down a barrage of fire from short ranged weapons, rather than digging in and taking potshots at a charging foe. I also wanted to avoid just making Tau really strong in melee all of a sudden.

2+ because they are literally at point blank range? I never understood how this wasn't a mechanic in 40k. I can see a sniper aiming at a grot across the map has a chance of missing, but don't tell me they don't have perfect aim at the stompa standing right next to them.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
2+ because they are literally at point blank range? I never understood how this wasn't a mechanic in 40k. I can see a sniper aiming at a grot across the map has a chance of missing, but don't tell me they don't have perfect aim at the stompa standing right next to them.

Have you ever tried to shoot someone who’s actively trying to kill you, at point blank range?

I haven’t-but I’d imagine it’s not easy.

I'm not wild about the idea of just making tau good in the fight phase. It feels like kind of lazy game design, and it detracts from the tau identity; homogenizing the faction's playstyle.

Rather than basically making fire warriors S5, make their alien auxiliaries decent in melee again, and give them some form of JSJ again so that they can move onto objectives after shooting enemies off of them.

You could probably give them some fun tricks (without upping their raw damage too much) by giving their HQs some interesting guard-style orders instead of mostly static auras. Imagine a fireblade allowing an infantry squad to shoot after disembarking from a vehicle or a commander with the right support system allowing units to immediately shoot at enemies arriving from reserves.

If you want to make tau good in the fight phase because you feel they lack offense and/or mobility, there are other ways to improve their offense and/or mobility without making fire warriors S5.

 JNAProductions wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
2+ because they are literally at point blank range? I never understood how this wasn't a mechanic in 40k. I can see a sniper aiming at a grot across the map has a chance of missing, but don't tell me they don't have perfect aim at the stompa standing right next to them.

Have you ever tried to shoot someone who’s actively trying to kill you, at point blank range?

I haven’t-but I’d imagine it’s not easy.

I have not, but I have had specialized training in how to do so. And, yes, I would assume it's hard to hit any astartes no matter the distance. That being said, real world isnt' = to fantast make believe fighting. Would giving them a 3+ be easier to stomach? I have to assume they have equal or better tech than what the SM's are toting around, so it stands to reason they should be at least as accurate.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
2+ because they are literally at point blank range? I never understood how this wasn't a mechanic in 40k. I can see a sniper aiming at a grot across the map has a chance of missing, but don't tell me they don't have perfect aim at the stompa standing right next to them.

Have you ever tried to shoot someone who’s actively trying to kill you, at point blank range?

I haven’t-but I’d imagine it’s not easy.

I have not, but I have had specialized training in how to do so. And, yes, I would assume it's hard to hit any astartes no matter the distance. That being said, real world isnt' = to fantast make believe fighting.

I mean, I'd think that factoring in the fantastical nature of the setting would make it even harder to shoot someone up close. Instead of dudes with normal levels of close combat training to throw off your shooting, you've got martial arts masters that aren't afraid to knock your gun away with a chainsword or destroy it with a power sword or move out of your line of fire with their inhuman speed.

Would giving them a 3+ be easier to stomach? I have to assume they have equal or better tech than what the SM's are toting around, so it stands to reason they should be at least as accurate.

Would making tau functionally stronger than a marine in melee and equally skilled at hitting things be easier to stomach than making them stronger than a marine and even more skilled at hitting things? Technically yes, but I still don't want Tau to be that good at punching things. (Even if you're technically fluffing it as shooting things; tau being S5 hitting on 3+ in the Fight phase really goes against their shtick.)

Also, pretty sure marines being WS 3+ doesn't have a ton to do with their tech. Being S4, T4, and BS 3+, sure. But their ability to punch well is probably mostly about the melee training that tau famously eschew (or at least don't emphasize.) I guess the servos in their armor might help, but fire warrior armor isn't known for having "punch better" features.

Can we all just admit there is a drunken passed out elephant in the room? This edition could be the death of a faction like Tau, and that's only a little hyperbole. Right now, they are basically fodder for even the weakest melee army. Their crap mechanics make their shooting less than trustworthy at range, and worse than useless in melee. Seeing as how 9th swung the pendulum really far towards Melee from the gun lines of 8th, factions like Tau are basically unplayable currently, without some major changes. They need some form of Howling Banshee unit, something good in melee, that can survive a turn 1 rush down, while the gun lines do their work.

What if Tau were allowed to shoot into melee, at units tagged with marker lights? And we threw in their blasters work as pistols?

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Can we all just admit there is a drunken passed out elephant in the room? This edition could be the death of a faction like Tau, and that's only a little hyperbole.

We can agree that Tau are currently underpowered and could stand to be improved. I don't think one suboptimal edition is threatening to wipe them from the game or anything.

Seeing as how 9th swung the pendulum really far towards Melee from the gun lines of 8th, factions like Tau are basically unplayable currently, without some major changes.

Did the pendulum swing all that hard? It made melee a viable option, but most armies seem to be relying on a mix of melee and shooting. I ask for the sake of identifying the actual issue with tau. Is the problem specifically that they don't do damage in the fight phase, or that they don't do enough damage period and struggle to move onto objectives the same turn that they kill things off of those objectives? Because if the problems being solved are A) Needing more damage output and B) Needing a way to move after shooting, there are ways to solve that that don't involve making tau lethal in the fight phase.

They need some form of Howling Banshee unit, something good in melee, that can survive a turn 1 rush down, while the gun lines do their work.

As an Iybraesil player who plays banshees almost every time I play my craftworlders, I agree; Tau could absolutely benefit from a C-list melee unit like howling banshees. I suggest buffing kroot and vespid to fill this role.

What if Tau were allowed to shoot into melee, at units tagged with marker lights? And we threw in their blasters work as pistols?

Blasters being pistols makes sense. What data exactly is a markerlight uploading to a firewarrior's helmet to make him better at shooting people in melee? There's a fluff-crunch disconnect there for me.

Tau charging into melee is silly. Riptides are already fine in melee, Crisis and Broadside suits just need to become vehicles so they can shoot into melee.

The JSJ Strat needs to become generic to allow 1 Crisis unit to hop unto an objective after any units holding it has been blasted. Riptide nova weapons and nova shields need a nerf so the JSJ option becomes better.

The rest is just a question of points and more favourable secondary objectives. Iron Hands got 4th at a GT with a gunline, it's not impossible to make it work. Kroot and Vespid becoming mandatory in competitive play wouldn't be great IMO, even if I think the Riptide route was wrong, I think a lot of players love Tau for what they have become and not what they used to be.

My standing suggestion for this remains:

Weapon Ability: Crisis
T'au warfare emphasises the flow of combat, using rapid redeployment and combined arms formations to transform any squad from a steady stone to a crashing wave.
Certain T'au weapons have the Crisis ability. Such a weapon will have an ability that reads ‘Crisis’ and then a value, such as (2) or (D3). In the Fight phase, if an INFANTRY or BATTLESUIT model is equipped with any Crisis weapons, these weapons have the Melee type instead of their normal type.

Each time a model fights, no more than one attack can be made with each Crisis weapon it is equipped with. Each time a melee attack is made with a Crisis weapon, make a number of hit rolls equal to the value listed after the Crisis ability. A model cannot make melee attacks with a Crisis weapon that it used to fire Overwatch this turn.

For example, a Pulse Carbine is a ranged weapon with the Crisis (2) ability. In the Fight phase, it becomes a Melee weapon. Only one melee attack can be made with it, but two hit rolls are made for that attack.

 vict0988 wrote:
Tau charging into melee is silly. Riptides are already fine in melee, Crisis and Broadside suits just need to become vehicles so they can shoot into melee.

The JSJ Strat needs to become generic to allow 1 Crisis unit to hop unto an objective after any units holding it has been blasted. Riptide nova weapons and nova shields need a nerf so the JSJ option becomes better.

The rest is just a question of points and more favourable secondary objectives. Iron Hands got 4th at a GT with a gunline, it's not impossible to make it work. Kroot and Vespid becoming mandatory in competitive play wouldn't be great IMO, even if I think the Riptide route was wrong, I think a lot of players love Tau for what they have become and not what they used to be.

The issue isn't whether gunlines "can work" in 9th edition – the issue is that T'au aren't meant to be a gunline. They never were. It's only comparatively very recently that they became one, due largely to a series of design failures and a very narrow understanding of what it means to be a "ranged army". If a T'au gunline – that is to say, a relatively static mass of units bristling with guns that exist to shoot until they get charged, then fall back and shoot some more until they die – is viable, then more power to it! Make it the Bork'an specialty, I don't mind. But it's not meant to be the core of how T'au fight, and even in the editions where they do play like that, it's entirely contrary to how the lore describes them fighting. That's how Imperial Guard fight, and that faction deliberately adds extra decision points to the playstyle through orders, varied tanks, specialised squads, heavy weapons, artillery, and so on.

RevlidRas wrote:
The issue isn't whether gunlines "can work" in 9th edition – the issue is that T'au aren't meant to be a gunline.

It is clearly an issue to other posters that say that armies like Tau cannot be good or that they need new units to compete. Tau were definitely always meant more as a gunline than an assault army, Crisis charging into melee and doing gun-fu is way less appropriate than gunline Tau. Adding gun-fu on top of the gunline base GW has created makes Tau more abominable, not less. It's too late to turn back from Riptides, Ghostkeels, let alone Stormsurges and Taunars. Any suggestion that has as a core Tau concept "charging into melee to do more damage" is silly. Now that you mention Astra Militarum, what is the tau version of fix bayonets? It's not a part of their strategic repertoire.

As a means of replacing Flying units being able to fall back and shoot, I can see the need for Crisis to be able to shoot in melee in case they get charged while holding an objective, but charging into melee to do more damage is stupid. Why wouldn't they just fire the extra shots at range, why do they have to get close to shoot again? Letting every Tau unit do gun-fu would be like turning Grey Knights into an all-female anti-Tyranids chapter created by Marneus Calgar.

 vict0988 wrote:

RevlidRas wrote:
The issue isn't whether gunlines "can work" in 9th edition – the issue is that T'au aren't meant to be a gunline.

Letting every Tau unit do gun-fu would be like turning Grey Knights into an all-female anti-Tyranids chapter created by Marneus Calgar.

Which sounds awesome!

More actionably, why not just collapse a few phases in 40k? Combine the movement and charging phases, and the shooting/fight phases?

A gunslinger SM chapter would be really cool I think.

 Nurglitch wrote:
More actionably, why not just collapse a few phases in 40k? Combine the movement and charging phases, and the shooting/fight phases?

It's not really on topic. It would require a tonne of work and if implemented poorly could make dual-role units that are supposed to be good at shooting and melee, unable to do either thing well. If you have a great way you'd want it to work then I think you should implement it into the Apocalypse game and make a new thread about it, because I remember not liking how melee/shooting currently works in Apocalypse.

 vict0988 wrote:

RevlidRas wrote:
The issue isn't whether gunlines "can work" in 9th edition – the issue is that T'au aren't meant to be a gunline.

It is clearly an issue to other posters that say that armies like Tau cannot be good or that they need new units to compete. Tau were definitely always meant more as a gunline than an assault army, Crisis charging into melee and doing gun-fu is way less appropriate than gunline Tau. Adding gun-fu on top of the gunline base GW has created makes Tau more abominable, not less.

At the risk of putting words into RevildRas's mouth, I think what he was saying is that tau are meant to be a mobile shooting army; not a static one. So if you tweak the army to go back to being mobile (ex: giving back some amount of JSJ), they might be able to compete without simply being good in the fight phase. You could stay out of combat by maneuvering more/better, take objectives by moving after shooting, etc. Gun-fu crisis suits are just a way to possibly improve crisis suits. And if that's not what he's saying, that's what I'm saying.

Knights, Tau, and IG really have a hard time in 9th. Why is that? Is it because we have obviously shifted to a turn 1 charge game, where the objective is to saturate the enemy with as many enemies in their face by turn 1, so that they can't grab objectives? Or is it because GW saw 8th as a failure where games were literally decided in a single turn just based off who goes first?

Tau are STILL hurting from the "ew Tau Player" stigma they rightly got in 7th, where it just simply wasn't fun to play against them, at all. They were so dominant, it still has a lasting effect on how people perceive the faction, and how they are played.

If we gave them Kroot and Krootox melee units, we'd essentially be turning them into a less powerful IG faction.

I can honestly say in my 4 years of experience, I have seen exactly 1 person who played Tau competitively. I've seen loads of people get conned into buying the "start Collecting" boxes, because they certainly look awesome, but then never bring them to game night at the store.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Knights, Tau, and IG really have a hard time in 9th. Why is that? Is it because we have obviously shifted to a turn 1 charge game, where the objective is to saturate the enemy with as many enemies in their face by turn 1, so that they can't grab objectives?

Sounds rough. That hasn't been my experience at all this edition though. It's pretty tough to pull off turn 1 charges if you're going first, especially if your opponent deployed deep into their deployment zone. Even my drukhari can't usually pull off a lot of good deployment zone-to-deployment zone charge on the top of 1 unless we're playing smaller games with smaller tables. And if my opponent moves into my charge range on their opening turn, that was a decision. When I get 2nd turn, I usually love it when my opponent pushes a bunch of units into my threat range.

Tau are STILL hurting from the "ew Tau Player" stigma they rightly got in 7th, where it just simply wasn't fun to play against them, at all. They were so dominant, it still has a lasting effect on how people perceive the faction, and how they are played.

Craftworld player here. I sympathize. It sucks, but that's not really relevant to the current discussion, right? (Except maybe as a warning of what not to do.)

If we gave them Kroot and Krootox melee units, we'd essentially be turning them into a less powerful IG faction.

That... doesn't seem true. I'm basically proposing turning kroot and vespid into C-list melee units that fall somewhere between catachan infantry and ogryn in terms of melee effectiveness. If the lack of such a unit is the only thing currently separating tau and IG, then surely that separation doesn't currently exist.

I can honestly say in my 4 years of experience, I have seen exactly 1 person who played Tau competitively. I've seen loads of people get conned into buying the "start Collecting" boxes, because they certainly look awesome, but then never bring them to game night at the store.

For a good chunk of last year and the year before, Tau were one of the most regular sights at my local game nights. I agree tau could use some help, but anecdotal experience is anecdotal and only sort of relevant to the topic at hand.

 vict0988 wrote:
A gunslinger SM chapter would be really cool I think.

 Nurglitch wrote:
More actionably, why not just collapse a few phases in 40k? Combine the movement and charging phases, and the shooting/fight phases?

It's not really on topic. It would require a tonne of work and if implemented poorly could make dual-role units that are supposed to be good at shooting and melee, unable to do either thing well. If you have a great way you'd want it to work then I think you should implement it into the Apocalypse game and make a new thread about it, because I remember not liking how melee/shooting currently works in Apocalypse.

This is on topic, since the topic is about making the T'au able to function in more than two phases. Rather than complicating the game with more special rules, why not simplify the game? In fact, 40k used to have regular movement and charge movement in the same phase in 1st and 2nd edition. For reasons that escape me shooting has always happened before close combat, but Epic Armageddon shows that they can be easily combined: if you're in base to base contact you have to use a close combat weapon (or a pistol) and if you're not then you get to use a ranged weapon. I think ranged combat and even movement would benefit from the Close Combat order of events, whereby the charging units move first, then players can alternate regular, advancing, and fall back movement starting with the player whose turn it is. Combat-wise, first the units that charged get to attack, then players alternate attacks starting with the player whose turn it is.

So:

Movement Phase
Psychic Phase
Combat Phase
End Phase (morale, etc)

There, T'au would now be able to do things when they're attacked in close combat without resorting to changing their profiles or rules.

 vict0988 wrote:

RevlidRas wrote:
The issue isn't whether gunlines "can work" in 9th edition – the issue is that T'au aren't meant to be a gunline.

It is clearly an issue to other posters that say that armies like Tau cannot be good or that they need new units to compete. Tau were definitely always meant more as a gunline than an assault army, Crisis charging into melee and doing gun-fu is way less appropriate than gunline Tau. Adding gun-fu on top of the gunline base GW has created makes Tau more abominable, not less. It's too late to turn back from Riptides, Ghostkeels, let alone Stormsurges and Taunars. Any suggestion that has as a core Tau concept "charging into melee to do more damage" is silly. Now that you mention Astra Militarum, what is the tau version of fix bayonets? It's not a part of their strategic repertoire.

As a means of replacing Flying units being able to fall back and shoot, I can see the need for Crisis to be able to shoot in melee in case they get charged while holding an objective, but charging into melee to do more damage is stupid. Why wouldn't they just fire the extra shots at range, why do they have to get close to shoot again? Letting every Tau unit do gun-fu would be like turning Grey Knights into an all-female anti-Tyranids chapter created by Marneus Calgar.

"Gunline" and "ranged army" are not synonymous. A "gunline" is what the name suggests – a largely static line (or cluster, or other formation) of ranged weapons, which do nothing but shoot until they can't anymore. It's a term that really has its roots in Warhammer Fantasy, where Dwarfs and Skaven (and other factions, to a lesser extent) could run a game almost without reference to the Movement phase. I'm not putting that playstyle down – in a well-balanced game, a gunline requires more skill than it suggests. It requires a player to maximize the value of each shooting unit at any given moment, squeezing out as much efficiency as possible by getting their placement and reactions and target selection right the first time, preferably a turn in advance.

It's also not how Tau are ever presented as operating. In fact, it's explicitly presented as something regarded with disdain by Tau Commanders, a failstate within the Tau doctrine. Tau are about mobility, encirclement, combined arms, and the risk-reward of close range firepower. That's been true as far back as the original 3.5e codex, which dominated with the Fish of Fury – a tactic that revolved around moving in close to unleash the maximum firepower, then using support units to either distract or mop up any survivors before they could drag you into melee, allowing you to retreat and do it again.

When people say they don't want Tau to be a gunline, they're not talking about handing each Fire Warrior a chainsword and a frenzon pack. They're talking about returning to the mobile, risky, in-and-out style of gameplay that was the Tau signature. Tau weren't designed to be bad in melee because they're just wimps, they were designed to be bad in melee because it emphasises the risks of this style – it removes the safety net of "oh well, my alpha strike failed, at least my guys are still decent in close combat", forcing you to either provide your own safety net via supporting units (which is what Kroot were initially for), or overcompensate to avoid failure (which is what Markerlights were initially for, and which requires good use of mobility to concentrate your forces without being enveloped).

"Give Tau some kind of offensive melee tool" is an answer that people keep coming back to, for pretty much the same reason. The ability to charge onto an objective is hugely valuable in 9e. Equally, the ability to outright avoid melee is almost absent – close-range is the new mid-range. Giving Tau the capacity to (through whatever means) launch an effective close range offensive fits into their original paradigm just fine – so long as it doesn't also serve as an effective/passive defensive tool in the style of For The Greater Good or raw combat stats.